Jeff Skilling of Enron Gets 24 Years

Jeffrey Skilling

Jeff Skilling Sentenced to 24 Years for Fraud

Jeffrey Skilling was sentenced yesterday to 24 years for fraud as a result of his actions as President of Enron, the bankrupt Texas power company. He says he will appeal. Some people commented that recent sentences for corporate skulduggery have been too harsh. Tell that to the thousands in jail for life for less and to the Enron employees and stockholders who lost millions thanks to actions by Skilling and others. .

Comments

No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

sending

jay draiman 6 years ago

Decisions we make today should result in a sustainable world for many generations into the future. Ensuring that decisions being made about our energy, water, and natural resources are sustainable is central to this belief. This also applies to political, economical and financial decisions that affect/obligates current and future generations.

Much is at stake when policy makers, regulators, and corporate executives face the challenges of evolving energy markets and efficiency.

Author

Ralph Deeds 7 years agofrom Birmingham, Michigan

U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear Skilling's appeal of his 24-year sentence for fraud at Enron.

Nachshon Draiman and Multiut charged $15 million judgmentHonorable John A. Nordberg: Enter Memorandum Opinion and Order. For the reasons set forth above, defendants motion for summary judgment is granted, and judgment is granted to plaintiff, and against defendants Multiut and Nachshon DraimanCase 1:02-cv-07446 Document 228 Filed 06/11/2008 Page 1 of 1UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE Northern District of Illinois &minus; CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 3.2.1Eastern DivisionDynegy Marketing and TradePlaintiff,v. Case No.: 1:02&minus;cv&minus;07446Hon. John A. NordbergMultiut Corporation, Nachshon Draiman, et al.Defendant.NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRYThis docket entry was made by the Clerk on Wednesday, June 11, 2008:MINUTE entry before the Honorable John A. Nordberg:Enter MemorandumOpinion and Order. For the reasons set forth above, defendants motion for summary judgment is granted, and judgment is granted to plaintiff, and against defendants Multiut and Nachshon Draiman, on Counts I and II of plaintiffs amended complaint, in the amount of$15,348,244.72 plus interest accruing from October 1, 2004. Judgment is granted for plaintiff and against defendants on Counts I through VI of defendantscounterclaims.Status hearing set for 10/2/2008 at 2:30 PM. [183],[196]Mailed notice(tlp, )ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Author

Ralph Deeds 9 years agofrom Birmingham, Michigan

Thanks! Good advice! Steal a little bit from enough people and it adds up to real money.

Jay Draiman, Utility auditor 9 years ago

Unauthorized Charges on Your Local Phone - Utility Bill?How to Find Them, Eliminate Them &amp; Get Your Money Back!If your business still gets its phone service through the old &quot;AT&amp;T and Verizon, etc&quot; local phone company (as opposed to one of the newer competitive phone providers) then you need to double check your phone bill each and every month for charges you did not authorize. You may not know it but the local phone company allows other companies to bill you through your local phone bill. And while the local phone company allows other businesses to bill you through your local phone bill, the local phone company does not verify that the charges being billed to you by the other company are valid. When these unauthorized charges fraudulently appear on your phone bill it's called &quot;cramming&quot;. Unfortunately you as the business owner or manager are the only one that can spot the unauthorized charges and if you don't comb over your bill every month to spot these unauthorized charges - you'll pay for them.Why does the local phone company allow other companies to pass charges onto your phone bill? &quot;Third-party billing&quot; is supposedly a great convenience in that you only have to pay one bill instead of separate bills for obvious authorized phone related charges like yellow-page advertising in the &quot;real yellow pages&quot;, 411 information calls and long-distance calls from your chosen long distance carrier. Over the years though, some less-than-scrupulous companies have realized that most businesses rarely scrutinize their local-phone bills. To take advantage of this, these companies have come up with elaborate schemes to placeunauthorized charges on your phone bill that you'll end up paying for without even thinking. Unauthorizedcharges you can end up paying for include charges for unwanted (and unused) email accounts, web sites,directory information calls, directory advertising in obscure publications, voice mail accounts and otherservices.In theory, before these charges can be placed on your phone bill, the company that is originating the third-party billed charges is supposed to have a verification of the order like a voice recording. In reality though,all the company needs to do to initiate the charge is submit your name and phone number to the billingentity. The verifications are only required to be produced if a complaint is filed.To prevent these charges from appearing on you business phone bill it's helpful to understand the fourparties that make unauthorized third party phone charges a costly reality. Party number one is anyemployee who can answer your business phones. The unauthorized charge is rarely random and it usuallyhappens after one of your company employees gets a telemarketing call. Employees should be instructed todocument and report any overly aggressive telemarketing calls they receive. Party number two is thetelemarketing company that originates the unauthorized charges by trying to get your employee to acceptsome service for which you'll be billed through your local phone bill. Party number three is the third-partybilling company that has billing agreements with your local phone company. The name of the third-partybilling is the one that is prominently displayed on your phone bill. After the third-party billing company'sname is the name of the company that is originating the unwanted charges. Party number four is your &quot;former Ma Bell&quot; local phone company that collects the unwanted charges (keeps a share for &quot;Ma&quot;) and then passes the rest to the third-party billing company (who keeps a big share) and then passes the balance on to the company that initiated the unwanted charge.Following are some of the top third-party billing names and unauthorized charge originators you'll find onyour phone bill. If you see these names on your phone bill you'll want to call the toll free number listed next to the charge to confirm it's a charge that's been properly authorized to be placed on your bill. Following are actual examples that we've recently found while auditing business phone bills.We recommend customers should review any utility bills issued by deregulated utility companies. (In most instances today, consumers are paying higher charges to the deregulated gas and electric supply companies).All Utility - Energy, gas, electric and water bills should be reviewed for proper reading and tariff. If you suspect that you have been overcharged ask for detailed explanation and or file a complaint with your State Utility Commission.

Compiled by: Jay Draiman, Utility Auditor

Author

Ralph Deeds 9 years agofrom Birmingham, Michigan

Thanks for another worthwhile comment. Seems to me that morality in the business community has declined in recent years as it has in the White House.

Jay Draiman 9 years ago

Nachshon Draiman, Chicago &ndash; a disgruntled owner and operator ofOn June 26th, 2008 Jay Draiman says:Nachshon Draiman, Chicago &ndash; a disgruntled owner and operator of a Natural Gas Supply company and Nursing Homes &ndash; who was caught by his brother Yehuda Jay Draiman and others was stealing from employees, customers, suppliers, banks and his partners including his own blind elderly mother. Initiated a campaign of smear and fraud with the presentation of fraudulent documents (a common practice) to the courts. State and Federal court records are replete with lawsuit and litigations against Nachshon Draiman and his businesses, Multiut, Future Associates and various Nursing Homes operated by Nachshon Draiman.The revocation of the Nursing Home license which was issued in 1975 initiated Nachshon Draiman&rsquo;s involvement in syndicating the purchase of numerous Nursing Homes in the Chicago metro area &ndash; the whole pyramid was based on fraud and deception by obtaining his license through fraud. (Some of the nursing homes were closed down and or forced by State officials to be sold). Lawsuits for patient&rsquo;s abuse and causing the death of a patient are common, including bank fraud confirmed by former Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Ellis. A major lawsuit by Dynegy vs Nachshon Draiman, Multiut, Future Associates Case No. 02 C 7446 for $22 million &ndash; numerous contempt of court orders and a $45 million by Israel Discount Bank for fraud, just to name a few, Utility billing fraud Gore vs. Multiut No. 01 CH 19688.Buying a Whistleblower case from the courts in order to solidify his cover-up of the fraud.Nachshon Draiman, Chicago &ndash; nursing home administrator license (044001323) revoked and finedIllinois Department of Financial and Professional RegulationNEWSIDFPRDisciplinary Actions for January 2008 SPRINGFIELDThe Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR)announced today that the Directors of the Division of Professional Regulation, Daniel E. Bluthardt, and Insurance, Michael T. McRaith, signed the following disciplinary orders in January. Orders for the Division of Banking were authorized by Director Jorge Solis.NURSING HOME ADMINISTRATORNachshon Draiman, Chicago &ndash; nursing home administrator license (044001323)revoked and fined $2,000 for misrepresenting information in his application concerning postgraduate education degree, to obtain nursing home administrator licensure from the Department.For additional information see: www.nachshondraiman.net

Author

Ralph Deeds 9 years agofrom Birmingham, Michigan

Thanks for the excellent comment!

Jay Drai 9 years ago

INCREASING COST OF ENERGY and INFLATED FRAUDULENT BILLING

It is not enough that consumers are paying higher cost for energy &ndash; Gas, Electric, Tel., Etc.

Due to the market volatility and the increase demand for energy worldwide and the manipulation of market conditions by various corporation.

Deregulation, which was designed to save the consumer on the cost of energy. Many new companies have started selling gas and electric in the past 20 years, as a result of this deregulation. We now have numerous deregulated third party suppliers of Gas and Electric that are gouging the consumers &ndash; billing prices higher than the regulated utility companies, inflating the bill, billing for product never delivered, billing phantom tax on the product, reneging on fixed price contract &ndash; when market prices go beyond the fixed contract. In short any way they can cheat, deceive and defraud the consumer is fair game.

Among the companies that practice such tactics is MULTIUT CORP or Multiut LLC of Skokie, Illinois the owner of the company Nachshon Draiman is well connected, one of the previous owners of Multiut was a federal judge and therefore has gotten away with numerous over billing and deceptive practices, there are numerous lawsuits for fraud pending against Multiut Corp and its owner Nachshon Draiman among them a Class Action Suit and Dynegy Mkg &amp; Trade v. Multiut Corp, Nachshon Draiman et al 1:02-cv-07446 The Federal Court has imposed numerous contempt orders against Multiut and its owner and its owner Nachshon Draiman is involved in numerous other fraud in the Nursing Home business (defrauding the state Nursing License with false documents to obtain a Nursing Home License) and a hotel project where he committed a fraud of $45 million dollars and numerous other fraud and deception too numerous to mention. (Especially since Multiut and its owner Nachshon Draiman is represented by Jack Abramoff Law Firm &ndash; which has clout).

Energy Billing Fraud Charges vs Multiut owned by Nachshon Draiman!

Multiut Admitted to holding money belonging to customers.In a Class Action proceeding initiated in November 2001 - The case after numerous delays by Multiut, is now proceeding.

Gore vs Multiut - IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS Case No. 01 CH 19688 (See: www.antidefamationusa.com) Another Company is Santana Energy out of Texas. Some utility companies were forced to refund the consumers hundreds of million of dollars due to manipulation of pricing and billing &ndash; many of those shenanigans stem from the Enron debacle some precede it and continue on to date.Many of these suppliers of Gas and Electric who are promoting saving are actually charging higher prices than the local utility company which defeats the intent of deregulation &ndash; Multiut&rsquo;s billing shows 20% to 30% higher cost and billing for gas that was never delivered. Not to mention Multiut&rsquo;s billing for non existent City of Chicago Tax on Natural gas and inflated billing for lighting retrofit to various Nursing Homes which inflates the Medicaid billing to the government.Corporate CEO and other higher ups in the corporate world have been convicted of fraud and sentenced/fined (WorldCom, Enron, Adelphia, Etc.). But it seems that some companies can continue to defraud the public without being hindered by the authorities.Other frauds by Gas Electric suppliers are: Centerpoint Energy Inc., Pending lawsuits are: AG files fraud suit against Sempra affiliate alleging Enron-like games.JDThis article is presented by Citizen for Honest and Fair Billing PS

THREE FORMER NICOR ENERGY EXECUTIVES AND OUTSIDELAWYER INDICTED IN ALLEGED CORPORATE FRAUD SCHEME

CHICAGO -- Three former executives of Nicor Energy L.L.C. and an outside lawyer for the Lisle, Ill.-based company were indicted today for allegedly engaging in a corporate fraud scheme to obtain $400,000 in bonuses and other benefits for themselves by inflating revenues - at times by as much as $6 million - and understating expenses to make the company appear more profitable than it actually was in 2001. The defendants allegedly fraudulently deprived Nicor Energy - a retail energy marketing company established in 1997 as a 50/50 joint venture by Nicor Inc. and Dynegy Inc. - of their honest services and caused a loss to investors in publicly-traded Nicor, Inc. and Dynegy. On July 18, 2002, Nicor Inc. issued a press release announcing that its financial results for the second quarter and first half of 2002 were negatively affected by several factors, including irregularities in accounting at Nicor Energy, and the following day, the stock price of Nicor Inc. fell approximately 40 percent. Nicor Energy is currently in the process of final liquidation. The five-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury charges Kevin Stoffer, formerly Nicor Energy's President and Chief Executive Officer; Andrew Johnson, former Director of Financial Services; John Fringer, former Vice President of Major Markets and Power Services; and outside counsel Michael Munson, announced Patrick J. Fitzgerald, United States Attorney for the Northern District of IllinoisJudge Concludes Energy Company Drove Up Pricesby Richard A. Oppel Jr. and Lowell Bergman, September 24, 2002 (New York Times) QUOTE: In the ruling, Curtis L. Wagner Jr., the chief administrative law judge at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, essentially validates the suspicions of California officials that El Paso, the nation's largest natural gas company, withheld natural gas from the state, thus driving up the cost of electricity...ABSTRACT: In a judge&rsquo;s ruling, a company who provides gas and energy supplies was found to have aided in raising the price of gas and electricity in California during previous energy crisis&rsquo;s. The El Paso Corporation allegedly withheld natural gas, and in doing so, raised both gas and electricity prices. The ruling is still up for further review and many lawsuits are pending, but the El Paso Corporation contends that operations were normal and that an appeal will follow if the current decision is upheld.--- C. Heimbuch-Skaley MADIGAN, DALEY ANNOUNCE $196 MILLION SETTLEMENT WITH PEOPLES ENERGY; CUSTOMERS OF PEOPLES GAS AND NORTH SHORE GAS TO RECEIVE $100 MILLION IN CREDITSChicago &ndash; Attorney General Lisa Madigan and Mayor Richard M. Daley today announced that Peoples Energy has agreed to more than $196 million in consumer credits and benefits as part of a settlement that will provide much-needed relief to current Peoples Gas and North Shore Gas customers, establish a more than $25 million program of conservation and weatherization assistance for low- and moderate-income households and reconnect customers who have been disconnected from their heating services due to an inability to pay the high gas prices. MADIGAN, DALEY, CUB ANNOUNCE REFUND CREDITS TO APPEAR ON NEXT GAS BILL FOR CUSTOMERS OF PEOPLES GAS AND NORTH SHORE GASChicago &mdash; Attorney General Lisa Madigan, City of Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley and Citizens Utility Board (CUB) Executive Director David Kolata today announced that as a result of their settlement agreement with Peoples Energy more than one million current customers of Peoples Gas and North Shore Gas will see refund credits on their next gas bills.To compensate for over billing consumers between 2000 and 2004, Peoples Energy has agreed to provide a refund credit to each of the 1,014,071 current customers of Peoples Gas and North Shore Gas. The credits &ndash; totaling $100 million &ndash; will be included on the first bill received by customers after April 24.&ldquo;These refund credits cannot change the conduct of Peoples Energy, but they will help consumers who suffered as a result,&rdquo; Madigan said. &ldquo;This is an appropriate response to Peoples' conduct.&rdquo;&ldquo;We are pleased that consumers are finally receiving the refunds that they deserve,&rdquo; said City of Chicago Corporation Counsel Mara Georges. &ldquo;Consumers should not have to pay for bad planning and business decisions by